Abstract
Abstract Sod-podzolic low-fertile soils (70% of the territory) are mainly widespread in the Novgorod region. According to the granulometric composition, the sown areas are mainly light and medium loamy. Technological operations include two methods of application of microbial fertilizers Azotovit and Phosphatovit: pre-sowing seed treatment (A+Ph, 2 l/t of each preparation) + foliar treatment in the phase of entering the tube (A+Ph, 1 l/ha of each preparation) together with mineral fertilizers (based on the planned yield and reduced by 50%), which contributes to an increase in oat grain production by 32 and 33%, and digestible protein by 30 and 34%, respectively, in relation to background 1 and background 2, where microbial fertilizers were not used. As an organic fertilizer, chopped straw of spring barley was plowed (4 t/ha) with addition of 10 kg of nitrogen for each ton. After harvesting cereals, a disc harrow was used to chop the straw and mix it with the soil at a depth of 0-10 cm.Taking into account the main articles of the arrival of humus (stubble-root residues of cereals and straw) in all variants of the experiment, soil fertility increased and its energy potential increased from 9 up to 16 GJ/ha.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 3
Claim · model-written summary
Azotovit and Phosphatovit application increased oat grain production by 32% and 33% relative to backgrounds 1 and 2.
- Taxon
- Oats
Avena sativat0 - Treatment
- microbial fertilizers Azotovit and Phosphatovite0
- Outcome
- oat grain productione1
- Direction
- increasee1
- Value
- 32 and 33%e1
- Comparator
- background 1 and background 2e2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“an increase in oat grain production by 32 and 33%, and digestible protein by 30 and 34%”
e2“in relation to background 1 and background 2, where microbial fertilizers were not used”
e0“Technological operations include two methods of application of microbial fertilizers Azotovit and Phosphatovit”
t0“Productivity of Oats”
Claim · model-written summary
Azotovit and Phosphatovit application increased digestible protein by 30% and 34% relative to backgrounds 1 and 2.
- Taxon
- OatsAvena sativat0
- Treatment
- microbial fertilizers Azotovit and Phosphatovite0
- Outcome
- digestible proteine1
- Direction
- increasee1
- Value
- 30 and 34%e1
- Comparator
- background 1 and background 2e2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“an increase in oat grain production by 32 and 33%, and digestible protein by 30 and 34%”
e2“in relation to background 1 and background 2, where microbial fertilizers were not used”
e0“Technological operations include two methods of application of microbial fertilizers Azotovit and Phosphatovit”
t0“Productivity of Oats”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil energy potential increased from 9 to 16 GJ/ha in all variants of the experiment.
- Taxon
- OatsAvena sativat0
- Outcome
- energy potentiale3
- Direction
- increasede3
- Value
- 9 up to 16 GJ/hae3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e3“in all variants of the experiment, soil fertility increased and its energy potential increased from 9 up to 16 GJ/ha”
t0“Productivity of Oats”
The same questions in other papers
fertilization · quality: protein · Avena sativa (oats)Results differ
24 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- negative
- no effect
- no effect
24 papers more in this group
See all 28 papers →fertilization · yield · Avena sativa (oats)Positive and negative results
142 papers in the same direction as this paper · 15 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- no effect
156 papers more in this group
See all 160 papers →Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.